|
JBJS welcomes reader comments on published articles. Letters to the Editor are reviewed by JBJS editors but are not peer-reviewed. To submit your letter, please follow the "submit a response" link that appears in the content box at the upper right of the full text of the article.
Letters to the Editor to:
-
- Scientific Articles:
Helen Razmjou, Albert Yee, Michael Ford, and Joel A. Finkelstein
- Response Shift in Outcome Assessment in Patients Undergoing Total Knee Arthroplasty
J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88: 2590-2595
[Abstract]
[Full text]
[PDF]
|
|
Electronic letters published:
-
Dr. Finkelstein et al. respond to Dr. Riddle et al.
- Joel A. Finkelstein, M.D., FRCS(C), Helen Razmjou, MSc, Dept. of Surgery & Physical Therapy, Holland Orthopedic & Arthritic Centre, Ontario, CANADA
(4 April 2007)
-
Role and Importance of Response Shift
- Daniel L. Riddle, PT, Ph.D., Elizabeth A. Lingard, BPhty, MPhil, MPH, Dept. of Orthopaedics, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
(4 April 2007)
|
Dr. Finkelstein et al. respond to Dr. Riddle et al. |
4 April 2007 |
|
|
Joel A. Finkelstein, M.D., FRCS(C), Orthopedic Surgeon Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center and the University of Toronto, CANADA, Helen Razmjou, MSc, Dept. of Surgery & Physical Therapy, Holland Orthopedic & Arthritic Centre, Ontario, CANADA
Send letter to journal:
Re: Dr. Finkelstein et al. respond to Dr. Riddle et al.
joel.finkelstein{at}sunnybrook.ca Joel A. Finkelstein, M.D., FRCS(C), et al.
|
Riddle and Lingard make an important point which supports our
sentiments that the implications of response shift in orthopedic clinical
research are potentially profound and need to be accounted for. These
authors, however, raise concern about the then-test methodology in measuring
response shift.
A growing body of literature has examined the impact of response
shift in patients. Schwartz et al.(1) in a recent meta analysis of
response shift-related articles reported that the majority of reviewed
articles (1966-2004) used the then-test design. Furthermore, it was only
these studies, which were able to provide requisite data for effect size
(ES) computation. Other response shift studies using individualized
measures, such as the Patient-Generated Index, Schedule of the Evaluation
of Individual QOL (SEIQOL), or qualitative interviews did not provide the
data necessary for calculating ES.
The then-test method assumes that respondents will use their post test
internal standards when providing a reevaluation rating of their baseline
score. We acknowledge that the then-test design has been criticized for
its susceptibility to recall bias. This has been evaluated by Visser et.
al.(2) in a convergent validity study. They measured response shift by the
then-test approach, anchor recalibration and Structural Equation Modeling
(SEM). They showed good convergent validity between the then-test approach
and SEM. The results of both of these methods were largely comparable.
This suggests that the SEM and the then-test approach measure the same
concept. These methods use statistically independent operations for
response shift. SEM does not use retrospective data and is, therefore, not
susceptible to recall bias. Based on the convergence of methods in their
study and for their results, this suggests that the then-test was not
affected by recall bias.
Generalizability to other then-test studies is not necessarily
guaranteed. Visser et al.(2) used a testing interval of 3 months; in our
study 6 months was used. Further study needs to be performed, whether the
convergence of methods will still show good convergent validity at 6
months. As such, we do agree with Riddle and Lingard that additional study
is required to further define the role of response shift and the potential
limitations in our ability to accurately measure this.
REFERENCES:
1. Schwartz CE, Bode R, Repucci N, Becker J, Sprangers MA, Fayers PM.
The clinical significance of adaptation to changing health: a meta-
analysis of response shift. Qual Life Res. 2006 Nov;15(9):1533-50. Review.
2. Visser MR, Oort FJ, Sprangers MA. Methods to detect response shift
in quality of life data: a convergent validity study. Qual Life Res. 2005
Apr;14(3):629-39. |
|
Role and Importance of Response Shift |
4 April 2007 |
|
|
Daniel L. Riddle, PT, Ph.D., Professor of Physical Therapy Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA, Elizabeth A. Lingard, BPhty, MPhil, MPH, Dept. of Orthopaedics, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Send letter to journal:
Re: Role and Importance of Response Shift
dlriddle{at}vcu.edu Daniel L. Riddle, PT, Ph.D., et al.
|
To The Editor:
In the paper "Response Shift in Outcome Assessment in Patients
Undergoing Total Knee Arthroplasty," Razmjou and colleagues (1) concluded
that patients demonstrated a response shift and that this finding supports
the need for accounting for response shift in clinical research. The
implications of these findings are potentially profound. Unless authors
account for response shift in randomized trials, for example, the findings
should be questioned.
The authors may indeed be right because response shift appears to be
real(2,3). However, we have a concern about the way in which the authors
quantified response shift. The authors used the Then-test approach to
measure response shift. The Then-test requires the person to complete, in
this case, a WOMAC pre-operatively and at 6 months postoperatively the
WOMAC is completed twice (reporting current status and recall of their
preoperative status). In other words, the Then-test assumes that because
more information is available to the patient following surgery, it is more
valid than serial change scores for detecting real change.
When using the Then-test, one must assume that patients accurately recall
their actual status several months prior and then adjust their WOMAC
ratings based on the newly adjusted internal standard. However, this
assumption has been challenged by others(4). In addition, the implicit
theory of change suggests that patients begin with their present state and
infer what their initial state must have been. An inherent part of this
theory is that recall of a previous state will be directly influenced by
the patient's current state and the recall data will be biased and
inaccurate(5).
We agree that Razmjou and colleagues examined a potentially important
issue but question the use of the Then-test to adjust for response shift
for clinical studies of arthroplasty. It incurs considerable burden on
the patients and accuracy of recall is questionable especially as the
length of time following surgery increases. Given the uncertainty in this
area, additional study is essential to correctly direct changes in the way
that clinical studies and trials are designed and conducted.
The authors did not receive any outside funding or grants in support of their research for or preparation of this work. Neither they nor a member of their immediate families received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, division, center, clinical practice, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors, or a member of their immediate families, are affiliated or associated.
References:
1. Razmjou H, Yee A, Ford M, Finkelstein JA. Response shift in outcome
assessment in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint
Surg Am 2006;88:2590-2595.
2. Linton SJ, Melin L. The accuracy of remembering chronic pain. Pain
1982;13: 281-285
3. Postulart D, Adang EMM. Response shift and adaptation in chronically
ill patients. Med Decis Making 2000;20:186-193.
4. Allison PJ, Locker D. Feine JS. Quality of life: A dynamic construct.
Soc Sci Med 1997;45:221-230.
5. Ross M. Relation of implicit theories to the construction of personal
histories. Psychol Rev 1989;96:341-347. |
|